CAN THE GOVERNMENT PROVIDE GWB?
One of the surprising consequences of the Economic Crisis has been that many people have been expressing the undoubted truth that financial comfort is not the most important thing in life. To be contented and happy in yourself is much more important. A number of leading political thinkers have been looking at this same issue.
Indeed it was Tony Blair back in about 1997 who argued that a priority within government should not just be GNP (gross national product - a measure of our financial strength) but also GWB (general well-being). In other words it was the responsibility of the government to help people become more content with life and to know a greater degree of happiness.
That is undoubtedly why now in the curriculum followed by all schools there is a subject called PHSE (Personal, Social, Health and Economics). It is all about how to live and get the most out of life. Once, parents saw that as their role and, in conjunction with the Church through Sunday Schools, took their duty seriously. Now the State acts as the ‘supreme parent’ and teaches children how to live according to their own values. We have considered before the issue of PHSE as a “tool for indoctrinating children in political correctness” (a description coined by a secular educationalist not me!) We must think about being content.
So what constitutes GWB and how can the government provide it? Well, the first thing you have to say is that general well-being as the national curriculum for schools defines it, and no doubt as the government sees it, is an extraordinary combination of things. It includes issues around self-worth and self-image, sex education (with an equal emphasis on heterosexual and gay relationships but an almost complete exclusion of the real meaning of marriage), equality issues (including a pluralistic approach to religion), economic and financial management, personal health and hygiene matters, social relationships, drugs and alcohol education and so on. Now some of those things are good and generally well handled (e.g. drugs and alcohol issues). But others are quite inappropriately handled, especially in the areas of religion and sex education.
What is so staggering is that there are in these areas of well-being many issues that are about personal conviction and belief and which also relate to personal history and background. Yet the government has the temerity to feel it has a right to speak about them with authority. In addition there are issues that are about what God has revealed in His Word, the Bible, and are not to be lightly disregarded as they are within the educational programmes.
The second matter that needs to be considered is the whole concept of what constitutes contentment. No doubt issues of self-worth and self-image are important, and wise economic and financial management of our personal affairs removes much anxiety. Similarly there are vital issues about health that need to be addressed by professionals giving good advice and information. In the same way addressing crime in general, and drug and alcohol related crime in particular, are very important and are the role of government. But can the government deal with the anxiety and fears that are endemic to life and the stresses of social relationships that arise in every day situations at home and in work? How far will the hand of government reach to help people to feel contented?
If we return to the idea of self-worth and self-image what is the basic expectation that we are to have? Are we all to be told that we are to think well of ourselves even when our behaviour is utterly reprehensible and self-centred? Are we all to adopt a view of life that enables no-one to feel guilty about themselves, but has everyone feeling that they are alright as they are? Should we all adopt the slogan “because you’re worth it” on the basis that we all are? Perhaps we will have government schemes designed to lift the morale of everyone and so we can all be like Gordon Brown, Lord Mandelson, David Cameron or Nick Clegg. Or perhaps we all need to be like David Beckham or ‘Freddy’ Flintoff! The fundamental question is what is the value base on which this general well-being is going to be based?
The one thing you can guarantee is that the values of the Bible will not feature in the thinking of those who project this call to address GWB. The Bible says, “godliness with contentment is great gain”1 and that takes us into a very different area. That sets before us God’s values and standards. The first thing we learn there is that we are valuable and have a wonderful self-image - we are made in the image of God! We are not the result of some evolutionary process and so we are more than animals. We are unique beings designed to know and enjoy God Himself. But we must also learn that we are less than we were made to be. We have fallen from our high identity and now we live on the ash heaps when we were made to roam the mountains. We are sinners and rebels before God. And that lies at the heart of all our discontent - “there is no peace for the wicked”2. So the fundamental need of every person in the world is to be made right with God. That only comes through faith in Jesus Christ.
In a true and absolute sense the only people who can be truly content are those who are believers in Jesus Christ and then who live by His ways and rules. That is not burdensome but blessed, although it has to be worked at3. Of course, non-Christians can know a form of contentment and we desire that for them at the very least. But ultimate and true contentment - true GWB - comes only through Christ. And the amazing thing about that is that it is not dependent on financial or economic well-being, nor does it demand social well-being to sustain it. It is a state of heart and mind that comes from fellowship with the Lord Jesus.
1 1 Timothy 6:6. 2 Isaiah 48:22. 3 Philippians 4:11.